Can a state have an official aroma? That topic will on attendees' minds when the annual New Mexico Chile Conference is held in Las Cruces today. The one-day conference will feature nearly 20 different speakers and presentations.

Stephanie Walker, New Mexico State University professor and conference chair said because the chile pepper is New Mexico's signature crop, it is near and dear to everyone's heart.

"We have chile peppers on our license plates, we have chile peppers in our artwork, they're attempting to pass a resolution through our State Legislature right now to make the smell of roasting green chiles the state aroma," she said with a chuckle.

Bill Soules, a Democratic state senator and former teacher and elementary school principal, introduced the chile pepper aroma resolution after a conversation with a class of fifth grade students in his district. New Mexico would become the first state in the nation with an official aroma if the measure is approved.

Walker said the chile conference will include talks about consumer preferences in taste, world-wide trends and challenges in production, including a discussion about pest control during the state's continued drought.

"As we get deeper into climate change, in many cases certain pests and weeds really get an advantage from these changing conditions and what we can do to kind-of up the ante in battling these challenges," he said.

Chile peppers have been cultivated in the Rio Grande Valley for four centuries. Walker said it is not especially hard to grow the peppers, but they don't like shade. Instead, he said, they need full, blazing sun and hot weather to get the most out of their long growing season.

"It's one of the reasons New Mexico's chili tastes so great is we have all that heat stress, and sunlight stress - it really brings out the heat in our peppers," Walker said.

About 60% of the U.S. chile pepper crop is grown in New Mexico. In 1996, the New Mexico State Legislature passed a House Joint Memorial declaring "Red or Green?" as the official state question.

Rural advocates are supporting the Farmland for Farmers Act in Congress. It would restrict the amount of Iowa farmland large corporations can own, and it is in response to foreign and domestic corporations buying up land and then renting it out.

As farmers start to retire, more than 40% of U.S. farmland will change hands in the next decade, but it might not wind up with young Iowans who want to farm.

Hannah Breckbill, co-farmer at Decorah-based Humble Hands Harvest in northeast Iowa, said out-of-state corporations buy the land and rent it to the highest bidder, keeping it out of local hands and driving land prices sky-high.

"Land prices have been going up and up and up," Breckbill observed. "In my career as a farmer -- which is not very long, only about a decade -- I've seen land prices more than double. And we need farmers to be on the ground, owning land."

Breckbill pointed out more than 50% of Iowa's 30 million acres of farmed land is rented and not locally owned. The Farmland for Farmers Act would restrict corporate investment, and supporters hope it is adopted as part of the new Farm Bill, scheduled to be debated this month.

Breckbill also helps overwhelmed young farmers find land in Iowa, and being a young farmer herself, has firsthand experience with navigating the daunting land acquisition process. She believes Iowa's farmland should be making a natural transition into the hands of beginning local farmers.

"We've gotten jobs on farms. We know how to farm. We have the skills. We have the knowledge. We have the capacity. We have the energy," Breckbill emphasized. "We just don't have the capital to be able to access the land."

The National Family Farm Coalition, which supports the Farmland for Farmers Act, released a fact sheet showing the average price of an acre of farmland in the U.S. has climbed to $3,800, the highest it has been since the 1970s. The Act has not yet received official support from Iowa's members of Congress.

The Environmental Protection Agency has upheld Montana farmers' right to repair their own equipment, and says doing so does not violate the Clean Air Act.

Montana farmers and ranchers joined with the National Farmers Union in writing to the EPA to oppose equipment manufacturers and dealers, who claimed farmers shouldn't be working on the emission-control systems on their high-dollar machinery. The farmers union said the dealers cited the Clean Air Act as justification for limiting the right to repair their own gear.

The EPA has sided with the farmers.

Montana Farmers Union President Walter Schweitzer said the last thing a farmer or rancher wants to do is run afoul of the Clean Air Act.

"It's quite frankly the opposite," he said. "What EPA wants and requires is the equipment manufacturers to give the farmers and ranchers, and the equipment owners, the tools so that they can maintain their emissions."

The "right to repair" movement isn't limited to farm machinery. Many states have legislation pending or have taken action on a person's right to have access to the tools they'd need to repair anything from smartphones and wheelchairs to e-tablets and heavy equipment.

Schweitzer added that when it comes to farming in Montana, waiting for an authorized tractor dealer to come to his farm and fix a piece of equipment can mean the difference between harvesting a crop before bad weather hits and losing it.

"Well, that happened to me," he said. "I was haying, had a tractor hooked to my baler, and I had a fuel sensor that was failing, and so it was shutting my tractor down randomly. So, here I am - I've got hay in a windrow ready to bale, rain could wreck it, and I don't have a tractor to bale."

The ruling by the EPA requires dealers to provide necessary software to farmers, allowing them to diagnose and fix their own farm equipment emissions issues. In this case, Schweitzer said, being able to do that would have saved him a $5,000 fuel-sensor repair bill.




get more stories like this via email

North Dakota farmers and fellow producers from around the country are in Washington, D.C., this week, calling on Congress to prioritize the soon-to-expire Farm Bill.

The sweeping policy, which carves out funding for agriculture programs as well as SNAP benefits, is updated every five years, and parts of the current version expire at the end of the month. The looming deadline is overshadowed by another fiscal fight: Lawmakers must agree on a broader spending plan by Oct. 1 to avoid a government shutdown.

Christopher Lundeby, a fifth-generation farmer from northeastern North Dakota, is among those meeting with members of Congress, asking them to kick-start efforts on the Farm Bill.

"You hope that they are truly feeling the same way that you are and are taking it to heart," Lundeby explained. "But at the same time, in the end, do they really agree with you or are they just trying to make you feel better?"

Lundeby is also with the North Dakota Farmers Union, which wants provisions like a stronger farm safety net, better and permanent disaster programs, and farmer-friendly climate provisions. But some House Republicans, namely the Freedom Caucus, have said they want reductions. Policy experts have said with an agreement out of reach for now, the current Farm Bill could see a temporary extension.

Even if a temporary extension happens, Lundeby pointed out there is real concern some aspects of the Farm Bill will be cut. He stressed with market concentration still a problem within agriculture, now is not the time to lose sight of protecting smaller farmers from corporate influence.

"Corporations and packers and other entities find the loopholes," Lundeby emphasized. "It needs work. It's getting better but it's still a struggle when it comes to some of the issues."

Labor organizations representing farmers also want federal policymakers to enact a competition title. They say it would increase fairness in the marketplace and address corporate consolidation in food and ag markets. Those who traveled to Washington to demand action are expected to wrap up their meetings today.